The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to investigate his complaints under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council was at fault in not having started stage 2 of the procedures for six months. It has agreed to apologise, pay Mr X £180 and move without further delay to stage 2 of the procedures. It has also agreed to develop an action plan to help prevent a reoccurrence in future.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council failed to investigate his complaints under the children’s statutory complaints procedure.
Mr X says that this has caused him frustration particularly because he is still waiting for some of the matters he complained about to be resolved.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I read Mrs X’s complaint and spoke with her about it on the phone.
I considered the relevant law, the children’s complaints procedure statutory guidance - Children's social care: getting the best from complaints , and our Guidance for practitioners on the children’s statutory complaints process .
Mrs X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I considered their comments before I made my final decision.
What I found
The children’s statutory complaints procedure There is a formal procedure, set out in law, which councils must follow to investigate certain complaints about children’s services. The procedure aims to ensure concerns are resolved swiftly and, wherever possible, by the people who provide the service locally.
Statutory guidance (the Guidance) provides details of what may form the subject of a complaint under this procedure. This includes all local authority functions within Part 3 of the Children’s Act 1989, which sets out the services councils must provide for children and their families in their area. The Guidance says a complaint may arise because of many things such as an unwelcome or disputed decision, concerns about the appropriateness or quality of a service, the impact on a child or young person of the application of a local authority policy or delivery or non-delivery of services including complaints procedures.
The children’s statutory complaints procedure involves three stages: Stage 1 - Local resolution by the council. This should take 10 days with a further 10 days for more complex complaints; Stage 2 – an investigation by an independent investigating officer not involved in the service who will prepare a detailed report and findings. The investigation is overseen by an independent person to ensure its impartiality. This stage should take 25 days or 65 days for complex cases; and Stage 3 – an independent panel to consider their outstanding issues. This should take 30 days to convene and hold the review panel and 5 days for the panel to issue its findings. The Council then has 15 days to respond to those findings.
What happened On 18 May 2021, Mr X complained to the Council about matters relating to his role as a foster carer. The Council accepted these complaints under the children’s statutory complaints procedures and on 9 June, it issued its stage 1 response to Mr X.
Mr X informed the Council on 23 June 2021 that he wished his complaints to go to stage 2 of the procedures. The Council acknowledged this on 4 August but then took no further action.
Mr X complained to the Ombudsman at the end of September.
In an update to the Ombudsman on 25 November, the Council stated Mr X’s complaint was still waiting to go to stage 2 of the statutory procedures. It explained the Council was struggling to recruit an independent investigator. The Council said it understood “that many local authorities are experiencing similar difficulties in the current pandemic environment. Continued efforts are being made to source and recruit an individual with the required experience to carry out this investigation”.
We wrote to the Council at the end of November and recommended that within one month, the Council: appoint an investigating officer and initiate the stage 2 investigation, providing Mr X with appropriate information about his rights under the process; and offer to make a payment to Mr X of £150 to acknowledge the five-month delay in initiating stage 2 and the uncertainty this has caused.
The Council responded in December. It accepted the financial remedy but said neither of the investigating officers it had sourced could begin the stage 2 investigation until the end of January 2022. It asked for a longer timescale to recruit an investigating officer and start stage 2.
My findings
The Council completed stage 1 of the process without delay. Mr X requested his complaint go to stage 2 in June 2021. To date, six months later, this stage has not started. This is a significant delay and is fault. This has caused Mr X frustration.
I note the Council’s comments that it is struggling to identify investigating officers. However, the guidance, which is statutory, specifies clear timescales for completing the children's statutory complaints process. The Council has agreed to take action to address the issues around sourcing investigating officers to prevent delays in other cases.
Agreed actions
Within one month of the date of the final decision the Council agreed to: apologise to Mr X for the delays; pay him £180 as an acknowledgement of the six-month delay in proceeding to stage 2 of the statutory procedures and the frustration and time and trouble this has caused him; and start stage 2 of the statutory procedures. If there are further delays, the Council should consider at either stage 2 or stage 3 of the statutory procedures whether a suitable financial payment is appropriate to remedy the injustice caused by these delays.
Within three months of the date of the final decision the Council agreed to develop an action plan outlining the steps it will take to source investigating officers to prevent delays in other cases.
Final decision
There was fault leading to injustice. The Council has accepted my recommendations. Therefore, I have completed my investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman